Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 20 Jan 2014 (Monday) 11:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

True or False: "All Canon Ultra Wide Zooms are Very Soft at the Corners"

 
n1as
Goldmember
2,327 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Jan 20, 2014 20:58 |  #16

Yes, all Canon UWA zooms are soft in the corners. They improves when stopped down, but are still soft in the corners.

Acceptable - workable, yes; but soft.

Zeiss 21 f/2.8 does what you want but it costs $1800 and is manual focus.


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Jan 20, 2014 21:02 |  #17
bannedPermanent ban

I must be easy to please. I like my 10-22.

You have all convinced me that there is no reason to purchase an UWA zoom for my 6D. Thanks for saving me some money.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tickerguy
Senior Member
595 posts
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jan 20, 2014 21:08 |  #18

I see some softness on my 15-85 in the corners when wide, but I'm a picky SOB. Is it bad, no. If I pixel-peep can I see it? Oh yeah.


Canon 7D & 5d3, EF-S 15-85, 24-105L, 70-200L f/4 IS, 100mm Macro/L, EF 50 f/1.4 and more

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 136
Joined Jun 2013
Location: oakland, ca
     
Jan 20, 2014 21:44 |  #19

I think the two wides that Canon offers in the L variations are less than impressive overall (especially on paper). I have seen them used to great effect though, so its kind of a conundrum. However, nobody should expect to use them wide open at max aperture and achieve stellar results. I, like many, am wondering when Canon is releasing their version of the Nikon 14-24. Until then, I rent. I refuse to buy what they are selling now.


Tumblr (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jkdjedi
Senior Member
Avatar
341 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Jun 2013
Location: California
     
Jan 20, 2014 23:06 |  #20

EOS5DC wrote in post #16622533 (external link)
I must be easy to please. I like my 10-22.

You have all convinced me that there is no reason to purchase an UWA zoom for my 6D. Thanks for saving me some money.

I was considering the Tokina 16-28 which is technically better than any of the uwa that Canon has to offer, but there's no such thing as a perfect wide.. staying put as well. (Tokina 11-16)


http://www.fernandezim​ages.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 344
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Jan 21, 2014 00:10 |  #21

My 17-40L is quite poor in the corners, well known for this lens.


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 123
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Jan 21, 2014 08:30 |  #22

Personally I find the 16-35 II to be pretty good even at the edges/corners. Sharpness does fall off a bit from the center wide open, but the lens is a keeper. BTW I had the ver I and when I went full frame upgraded to ver II. Well worth it IMO.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
titi_67207
Senior Member
Avatar
496 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Strasbourg, France
     
Jan 21, 2014 08:42 |  #23

Tony_Stark wrote in post #16622916 (external link)
My 17-40L is quite poor in the corners, well known for this lens.

Stopped down to f/8 or f/11, I found the corner sharpness enough correct to keep this "nifty" 17-40L :)

Titi


Canon 5D MkII + Sony A7 + 24x36 & 6x6 B&W film cameras .
CV 15 4.5 III | TS-E 24L II | FE 28 2 | (50+85) 1.4 | 135 2 | 70-200 4.0L | a collection of old Zuikos + FD + Adaptall + AI-s + M42

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
THREAD ­ STARTER
That's my line!
Avatar
9,488 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2151
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jan 21, 2014 09:01 |  #24

jkdjedi wrote in post #16622807 (external link)
I was considering the Tokina 16-28 which is technically better than any of the uwa that Canon has to offer, but there's no such thing as a perfect wide.. staying put as well. (Tokina 11-16)

The more I think/read about it the more I lean toward the Tokina camp.

16-28 sounds like a winner. Now I just have to double this pile of $20s.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterbug ­ guy
Member
Avatar
202 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Thailand
     
Jan 21, 2014 09:01 |  #25

Check out this review then rethink the 16-35II being soft in the corners stopped down, compared against some heavy hitters.

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/12673​45 (external link)

Roger




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
THREAD ­ STARTER
That's my line!
Avatar
9,488 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2151
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jan 21, 2014 09:23 |  #26

shutterbug guy wrote in post #16623648 (external link)
Check out this review then rethink the 16-35II being soft in the corners stopped down, compared against some heavy hitters.

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/12673​45 (external link)

Roger

Looks like all those corner sharpness tests were done at f/8. But I'm on my phone right now so I might have missed something. It is also 4x the cost of the 20-35 and 2x the cost of the Tokina 16-28 which seems to be equivalent, possibly better, in terms of sharpness


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rparchen
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Likes: 77
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Jan 21, 2014 09:51 |  #27

n1as wrote in post #16622521 (external link)
Yes, all Canon UWA zooms are soft in the corners. They improves when stopped down, but are still soft in the corners.

Acceptable - workable, yes; but soft.

Zeiss 21 f/2.8 does what you want but it costs $1800 and is manual focus.

I thought my 17-40 was workable until I got the Zeiss 21. There is no looking back after using a lens like that.


Rick - Sony A7R (RIP 6D), Samyang 14, Zeiss 21/35/50, Canon 70-200L
Facebook page for updates (external link)
www.parchenphotography​.com (external link)
IG: @ParchenPhotography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 123
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Jan 21, 2014 11:33 |  #28

Canon's 20-35mm f/2.8 was/is not a good lens. Even when it was new the Canon's 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 out performed it.

The tests shown on Fred Miranda's website show results at several apertures.

If you have a lot of dough to spend, you can buy several lenses and get good corner sharpness at most focal lengths. I however, have to deal with a budget.:(


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,483 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 577
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jan 21, 2014 11:54 |  #29

n1as wrote in post #16622521 (external link)
Yes, all Canon UWA zooms are soft in the corners. They improves when stopped down, but are still soft in the corners.

Acceptable - workable, yes; but soft.

This is true, but I do also want to note one thing. The 'brick test' that the OP posted is really misleading for the Canon UWA lenses. These lenses all suffer from some curvature of field, so when you focus on bricks at the center of the frame, what you see is not just soft corners at the edge, but also corners that are a bit out of focus.

I'm not going to try and suggest the Canon UWA lenses have awesome corner sharpness, but do be sure not to mistake curvature of field for corner softness.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
THREAD ­ STARTER
That's my line!
Avatar
9,488 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2151
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jan 21, 2014 12:22 |  #30

JeffreyG wrote in post #16624105 (external link)
This is true, but I do also want to note one thing. The 'brick test' that the OP posted is really misleading for the Canon UWA lenses. These lenses all suffer from some curvature of field, so when you focus on bricks at the center of the frame, what you see is not just soft corners at the edge, but also corners that are a bit out of focus.

I'm not going to try and suggest the Canon UWA lenses have awesome corner sharpness, but do be sure not to mistake curvature of field for corner softness.

Yup. I'm surprised it took so long for someone to bring this up. Youd win a prize but i dont have one. As I was testing, I took a few shots where I focused straight ahead and then took one or two short steps forward before releasing the shutter. I did notice slight improvement at the time but did not take the time to figure out which shots were which before posting here.

To be honest, I that shot might have been one that was a small step closer because the center seems just a touch less sharp than the others. In the other example, the tree on the far left was certainly closer than the center focus point trees and definitely shows loss of sharpness.

Disclaimer: I'm not exactly sure how field curvature works but my understanding is that a little bit of back focusing can help correct it. I would also think that adequate DOF would take care of it.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,954 views & 0 likes for this thread
True or False: "All Canon Ultra Wide Zooms are Very Soft at the Corners"
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is M0710NM4N
772 guests, 224 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.